I sometimes wondered if I should've gone for an MBA rather than my MS in CS. Oh well..
It's not too late. I've spent 8 years doing software and am now doing a full time MBA program. There are a lot of folks in my class who also have an MS in engineering, but are finding the degree wasn't worth what they thought it would be.
There's no pay/benefits/security/advancement in software anymore. There arguably never was, ignoring the few blips in the late nineties.
If nobody knows about these bills, then they are probably not important, and don't deserve to be made into laws to begin with. This is why I'd support a direct democracy with every non-vote considered a "no". This would mean that only the very, very important issues that people feel strongly about ever get elevated into the law.
I'd also like to see an automatic 10-year sunset on every law on the books, applied retroactively.
Go ahead. Get rid of your IT staff, because "everything just works." It'll be fine - for a month or so. After that, good luck; you'll be living on borrowed time.
If a company's IT infrastructure starts spontaneously disintegrating after a month, I'd question the talent of the people that put it together.
Just as a business shouldn't need a staff carpenters on hand to re-build walls that fall down, it shouldn't need a staff of IT experts on hand to re-build failing infrastructure.
This is worrying. I see a lot of comments along the lines of "If you don't want to be shamed on camera, simply don't do whatever it is they're filming you for!"
I hate to be the guy to Godwin a thread, but well, I have to be that guy today. Think about how well you folks would have fit in with Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia... "Well, if you don't want us filming you and posting it, STOP BEING SO DAMN JEWISH IN PUBLIC!!!" or "Well, if you don't want us turning you in, comrade, stop talking about how great capitalism is!"
The world would be a lot nicer place if people would worry about themselves and their own lives, and stop worrying about what other people are doing. This advice scales all the way from global politics down to you and your neighbor's dog crap.
Be careful. As someone pointed out upthread, the police are NOT your friend. Their job is NOT to help you, but to put you in jail. For my own safety, I would be very hesitant to call the police for anything but a major crime, one that presents them a clear opportunity to put someone ELSE in jail.
Like another poster mentioned, this is just a blatant case of using the police as gangster-like money collectors. It's a big problem when you start measuring your laws and law-enforcement techniques in terms of how much PROFIT they generate.
It sounds like an all-too-common case of too many police, not enough crime.
If they're down to spending their time going after deer poachers, they're already scraping the bottom of the crime barrel. Perhaps they need to start making cuts in the police force rather than investing in a $2,000 money-making deer robot.
I'm going to be the contrarian here. Most tailgaters I see (including myself, of course) have legitimate gripes. If you have nobody in front of you and a queue of cars behind you, chances are you are going too slow!
I always try to be aware of my surroundings, including looking in the rear-view mirror. If I'm in the left lane and there is someone approaching from the rear, it's easier and safer to reserve moral judgement about their character and do the smart thing--pull to the right at the earliest possible opportunity and let him overtake me. Why can't everyone manage to do that? See, when I happen to be the one in an unusual hurry, 9 times out of 10, the guy in front of me in the left lane is totally oblivious of my presence. To wake him up, I either have to drive dangerously close, pass on the right, or hit him with a few high-beam blasts. It's a no-win situation for both of us.
Same with a single-lane road. If you simply must drive slow and enjoy the view, have the courtesy to pull to the shoulder when people approach who actually have a destination they are looking forward to reaching.
Sure, there's the occasional idiot who gets in the left lane and tails everybody within inches, making them all pull over one by one, but these tailgaters are in the minority.
Please hang up the phone, be aware of your surroundings (especially the people behind you), and keep up with the flow of traffic. In short, drivers should be participants, not obstacles.
If there is no evidence that Bridgestone tires are actually safer than "Ridgestone" tires, than purchasing the higher-priced Bridgestone tires is irrational. You're basically throwing away money for a "B". I would love to have you as a customer.
The drug use itself isn't the problem, but it's a symptom.
Then why is posession of the drug illegal? You said it yourself. If junkies bought drugs with their own money, then quietly shot up in the corner and never bothered anyone, it wouldn't be an issue. So why is this a crime, again?
The people who are in prison for "using drugs" are not innocent drug users. That's simply all they got caught for. But make no mistake: they are liars, cheaters, thieves, burglars and in many cases, much worse.
Lying and cheating are already crimes (fraud). Thievery and burglary are also already crimes. If this is all that those evil drug users do, then why do we need to make possession a crime? Surely they could be put away for robbing people.
If you swept through a neighborhood and locked up all the drug users, you'd see virtually all other property crime disappear.
You'd see virtually all the people disappear too. Mass imprisonment is not the solution to any problem.
But where is the line drawn? If I walk up to a crowd and say, "Hey, let's all punch this guy in the face a few times!" Is that illegal? What if I just walk up to you and inform you that I'm going to kick you in the nuts? What if your boss threatens to fire you (taking away your livelihood)?
There is nothing inherently harmful about threatening people. It's dangerous to make any kind of speech illegal.
Say I'm in Mexico with a trebuchet and tons of pot. Let's say for the sake of argument that we paid off the federales, and we can operate with impunity. Let's say you're in Texas with a catapult. If you send me money via your catapult and I send you bales of dope via my trebuchet, I'm guilty of selling drugs in the US, even though I never set foot on US soil.
It's this kind of logic that makes the rest of the world realize that the USA is indeed trying to police the world.
OK, I'll bite. WTF is star gate? There have already been about 50 posts about it to this thread. Is it some kind of new Internet meme that I've never heard of?
I'll have to agree with SilentChris here. I have not seen a single company where you can advance past "lead software monkey" without an advanced degree. A masters in something technical might get you one rung higher, but if you want to go into a Director or C-level position, you need an MBA.
I can't believe it's 2006 and there are still people who believe that in 2003:
1. Iraq posed a threat to the coalition 2. Iraq had functional weapons of mass destruction 3. Iraq had anything to do with Al Qaeda, terrorists or terror suspects
Of all the evil this war has caused, I think the worst is the new American Culture of Willful Ignorance that its backers have advocated since before the opening shots were fired.
So, wait. Let me get this straight. "Advocating a criminal lifestyle" is now illegal? So I'm a criminal if I were to say "I think we should all drive 10 MPH above the speed limit every time we're on the highway."
Dual income households have become mandatory in most areas unless you're part of the relatively privileged few who can afford to have a spouse stay home and still maintain a roof over their heads and food on the table.
Waaaaah! Someone put a gun to my head and forced my lifestyle upon me!
I mean, seriously... how much does it really cost to "keep a roof over 2 people and keep them fed" in a normal "middle class" neighborhood? One could live quite comfortably for under $2000 a month, which is just over $11 an hour. I wouldn't say someone making over $11/hr is part of the "privileged few".
Now if you decide to start squeezing out kids you can't afford, that's another story. Again, nobody's putting a gun to your head.
These are aging industries run by aging men, and they're up against 17-year-olds who have turned themselves into electronic Hezbollah because they resent the content industry for its proprietary practices.
Dear EFF: It's probably not such a good idea to align yourself with terrorist groups. Remember:
"But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow"
Here we go again with the Doorknob Analogy. I see your "try turning all the doorknobs" and raise you a "don't leave your door open with a big neon sign that says WIDE OPEN DOOR HERE".
When Congress first finds out about a government program by reading a newspaper article made possible only by an insider's leak, you know the system is not working. The checks and balances and chain of accountability you have painstakingly spelled out are clearly not being followed.
Congress and the President are also answerable to the Constitution, which forbids warrantless domestic spying.
Of course everyday people do not need to know the detailed tactics and methods of law enforcement, but they DO need to know that such tactics are lawful, have been authorized by Congress and have been reviewed by the judiciary. I'm surprised that someone who seems to know so much about civics needs THIS spelled out.
If you have ever read any of my posting history you would know that I am also against the Drug War and ATF raids on peaceful citizens, so I'm not sure why you brought that up.
You say you "might" be concerned when the government starts using this domestic spy network to harass ordinary (non-enemy) people? I doubt it.
1. The government has a secret court that it uses to get warrants for searches that it feels it can't go to a regular court for. It has been caught bypassing this court, presumably when it doesn't even have enough evidence for these kangaroo courts.
Where's your concern?
2. The government admitted to monitoring international phone calls and has a list of all phone numbers ever called domestically.
Where's your concern?
3. Now it looks like the government uses this list not for fighting terror, but for going after political enemies.
Where's your concern?
Now if a Democrat president were in office now, and he had such powers would you be concerned?
Wow, you're making a lot of assumptions there, and presenting them as facts.
There are agents hostile to the US and all it's citizenry among us. Proof? How about just evidence?
Now, I'm not 100% on board with everything the government tries to sell as 'fighting terrorism', but I'll be damned if I'm gonna get worked up because we're monitoring the phone calls of someone in the US who has connections to know terrorists. How do you know they are only going after "the enemy"? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some crackhead looking for his next fix. How do you know? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some worthless gangbanger getting gunned down by some other worthless gangbanger (~50% of murders). How do you know? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some piece of white trash who went too far with his latest wife beating. How do you know? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some crazy woman who drowned all her kids. How do you know? Where is the accountability?
These are people who have made the cold, conscious decision that you need to die, and they work with others who feel the same, and they are funded by countries or entities who are hostile to us. How do you know? Where is the accountability?
You seem to believe that these techniques are only being used on certain really bad people. How do you know this? Are you privvy to some government knowledge that the rest of us 99.9% aren't? How am I, a normal every day citizen, supposed to know this?
Level of detail wise, the terrain does not render with any sophisticated geometry morphing situation. That's one of those things that for years I think most of the research that's gone into has been wasted. Geometry level of detail on terrain...there have been thousands of papers written about it, and I honestly don't think it's all that important. The way the hardware works, you're so much better off setting down a static mesh that's all in vertex and index buffers, and just letting the hardware plow through it, rather than going through and having the CPU attempt to do some really clever cross blended interpolation of vertices.
Ahh, the sweet sweet sound of infinite memory! Geometry detail algorithms ARE useful and relevant when you are dealing with tough memory constraints, especially on embedded platforms. Sure, it's nice to be able to just leave all the models in memory and just glDrawElements over and over, but this is only an option for platforms with a lot of memory or those that can quickly load the data over and over.
Slashdot Mirror
I sometimes wondered if I should've gone for an MBA rather than my MS in CS. Oh well..
It's not too late. I've spent 8 years doing software and am now doing a full time MBA program. There are a lot of folks in my class who also have an MS in engineering, but are finding the degree wasn't worth what they thought it would be.
There's no pay/benefits/security/advancement in software anymore. There arguably never was, ignoring the few blips in the late nineties.
If nobody knows about these bills, then they are probably not important, and don't deserve to be made into laws to begin with. This is why I'd support a direct democracy with every non-vote considered a "no". This would mean that only the very, very important issues that people feel strongly about ever get elevated into the law.
I'd also like to see an automatic 10-year sunset on every law on the books, applied retroactively.
Go ahead. Get rid of your IT staff, because "everything just works." It'll be fine - for a month or so. After that, good luck; you'll be living on borrowed time.
If a company's IT infrastructure starts spontaneously disintegrating after a month, I'd question the talent of the people that put it together.
Just as a business shouldn't need a staff carpenters on hand to re-build walls that fall down, it shouldn't need a staff of IT experts on hand to re-build failing infrastructure.
This is worrying. I see a lot of comments along the lines of "If you don't want to be shamed on camera, simply don't do whatever it is they're filming you for!"
I hate to be the guy to Godwin a thread, but well, I have to be that guy today. Think about how well you folks would have fit in with Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia... "Well, if you don't want us filming you and posting it, STOP BEING SO DAMN JEWISH IN PUBLIC!!!" or "Well, if you don't want us turning you in, comrade, stop talking about how great capitalism is!"
The world would be a lot nicer place if people would worry about themselves and their own lives, and stop worrying about what other people are doing. This advice scales all the way from global politics down to you and your neighbor's dog crap.
Be careful. As someone pointed out upthread, the police are NOT your friend. Their job is NOT to help you, but to put you in jail. For my own safety, I would be very hesitant to call the police for anything but a major crime, one that presents them a clear opportunity to put someone ELSE in jail.
Like another poster mentioned, this is just a blatant case of using the police as gangster-like money collectors. It's a big problem when you start measuring your laws and law-enforcement techniques in terms of how much PROFIT they generate.
It sounds like an all-too-common case of too many police, not enough crime.
If they're down to spending their time going after deer poachers, they're already scraping the bottom of the crime barrel. Perhaps they need to start making cuts in the police force rather than investing in a $2,000 money-making deer robot.
I'm going to be the contrarian here. Most tailgaters I see (including myself, of course) have legitimate gripes. If you have nobody in front of you and a queue of cars behind you, chances are you are going too slow!
I always try to be aware of my surroundings, including looking in the rear-view mirror. If I'm in the left lane and there is someone approaching from the rear, it's easier and safer to reserve moral judgement about their character and do the smart thing--pull to the right at the earliest possible opportunity and let him overtake me. Why can't everyone manage to do that? See, when I happen to be the one in an unusual hurry, 9 times out of 10, the guy in front of me in the left lane is totally oblivious of my presence. To wake him up, I either have to drive dangerously close, pass on the right, or hit him with a few high-beam blasts. It's a no-win situation for both of us.
Same with a single-lane road. If you simply must drive slow and enjoy the view, have the courtesy to pull to the shoulder when people approach who actually have a destination they are looking forward to reaching.
Sure, there's the occasional idiot who gets in the left lane and tails everybody within inches, making them all pull over one by one, but these tailgaters are in the minority.
Please hang up the phone, be aware of your surroundings (especially the people behind you), and keep up with the flow of traffic. In short, drivers should be participants, not obstacles.
If there is no evidence that Bridgestone tires are actually safer than "Ridgestone" tires, than purchasing the higher-priced Bridgestone tires is irrational. You're basically throwing away money for a "B". I would love to have you as a customer.
The drug use itself isn't the problem, but it's a symptom.
Then why is posession of the drug illegal? You said it yourself. If junkies bought drugs with their own money, then quietly shot up in the corner and never bothered anyone, it wouldn't be an issue. So why is this a crime, again?
The people who are in prison for "using drugs" are not innocent drug users. That's simply all they got caught for. But make no mistake: they are liars, cheaters, thieves, burglars and in many cases, much worse.
Lying and cheating are already crimes (fraud). Thievery and burglary are also already crimes. If this is all that those evil drug users do, then why do we need to make possession a crime? Surely they could be put away for robbing people.
If you swept through a neighborhood and locked up all the drug users, you'd see virtually all other property crime disappear.
You'd see virtually all the people disappear too. Mass imprisonment is not the solution to any problem.
But where is the line drawn? If I walk up to a crowd and say, "Hey, let's all punch this guy in the face a few times!" Is that illegal? What if I just walk up to you and inform you that I'm going to kick you in the nuts? What if your boss threatens to fire you (taking away your livelihood)?
There is nothing inherently harmful about threatening people. It's dangerous to make any kind of speech illegal.
Say I'm in Mexico with a trebuchet and tons of pot. Let's say for the sake of argument that we paid off the federales, and we can operate with impunity. Let's say you're in Texas with a catapult. If you send me money via your catapult and I send you bales of dope via my trebuchet, I'm guilty of selling drugs in the US, even though I never set foot on US soil.
It's this kind of logic that makes the rest of the world realize that the USA is indeed trying to police the world.
Thanks for the info.
OK, I'll bite. WTF is star gate? There have already been about 50 posts about it to this thread. Is it some kind of new Internet meme that I've never heard of?
I'll have to agree with SilentChris here. I have not seen a single company where you can advance past "lead software monkey" without an advanced degree. A masters in something technical might get you one rung higher, but if you want to go into a Director or C-level position, you need an MBA.
I can't believe it's 2006 and there are still people who believe that in 2003:
1. Iraq posed a threat to the coalition
2. Iraq had functional weapons of mass destruction
3. Iraq had anything to do with Al Qaeda, terrorists or terror suspects
Of all the evil this war has caused, I think the worst is the new American Culture of Willful Ignorance that its backers have advocated since before the opening shots were fired.
So, wait. Let me get this straight. "Advocating a criminal lifestyle" is now illegal? So I'm a criminal if I were to say "I think we should all drive 10 MPH above the speed limit every time we're on the highway."
If a project doesn't require strong encryption, does it require encryption at all?
This is about BASIC FREEDOMS here! I'm gonna ENJOY my coffee.
Dual income households have become mandatory in most areas unless you're part of the relatively privileged few who can afford to have a spouse stay home and still maintain a roof over their heads and food on the table.
Waaaaah! Someone put a gun to my head and forced my lifestyle upon me!
I mean, seriously... how much does it really cost to "keep a roof over 2 people and keep them fed" in a normal "middle class" neighborhood? One could live quite comfortably for under $2000 a month, which is just over $11 an hour. I wouldn't say someone making over $11/hr is part of the "privileged few".
Now if you decide to start squeezing out kids you can't afford, that's another story. Again, nobody's putting a gun to your head.
These are aging industries run by aging men, and they're up against 17-year-olds who have turned themselves into electronic Hezbollah because they resent the content industry for its proprietary practices.
Dear EFF: It's probably not such a good idea to align yourself with terrorist groups. Remember:
"But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow"
Great, let's turn this into a Political Party Pissing Contest. Both parties are wrong. Happy? Now let's debate the actual issues.
Here we go again with the Doorknob Analogy. I see your "try turning all the doorknobs" and raise you a "don't leave your door open with a big neon sign that says WIDE OPEN DOOR HERE".
When Congress first finds out about a government program by reading a newspaper article made possible only by an insider's leak, you know the system is not working. The checks and balances and chain of accountability you have painstakingly spelled out are clearly not being followed.
Congress and the President are also answerable to the Constitution, which forbids warrantless domestic spying.
Of course everyday people do not need to know the detailed tactics and methods of law enforcement, but they DO need to know that such tactics are lawful, have been authorized by Congress and have been reviewed by the judiciary. I'm surprised that someone who seems to know so much about civics needs THIS spelled out.
If you have ever read any of my posting history you would know that I am also against the Drug War and ATF raids on peaceful citizens, so I'm not sure why you brought that up.
You say you "might" be concerned when the government starts using this domestic spy network to harass ordinary (non-enemy) people? I doubt it.
1. The government has a secret court that it uses to get warrants for searches that it feels it can't go to a regular court for. It has been caught bypassing this court, presumably when it doesn't even have enough evidence for these kangaroo courts.
Where's your concern?
2. The government admitted to monitoring international phone calls and has a list of all phone numbers ever called domestically.
Where's your concern?
3. Now it looks like the government uses this list not for fighting terror, but for going after political enemies.
Where's your concern?
Now if a Democrat president were in office now, and he had such powers would you be concerned?
Wow, you're making a lot of assumptions there, and presenting them as facts.
There are agents hostile to the US and all it's citizenry among us.
Proof? How about just evidence?
Now, I'm not 100% on board with everything the government tries to sell as 'fighting terrorism', but I'll be damned if I'm gonna get worked up because we're monitoring the phone calls of someone in the US who has connections to know terrorists.
How do you know they are only going after "the enemy"? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some crackhead looking for his next fix.
How do you know? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some worthless gangbanger getting gunned down by some other worthless gangbanger (~50% of murders).
How do you know? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some piece of white trash who went too far with his latest wife beating.
How do you know? Where is the accountability?
This isn't some crazy woman who drowned all her kids.
How do you know? Where is the accountability?
These are people who have made the cold, conscious decision that you need to die, and they work with others who feel the same, and they are funded by countries or entities who are hostile to us.
How do you know? Where is the accountability?
You seem to believe that these techniques are only being used on certain really bad people. How do you know this? Are you privvy to some government knowledge that the rest of us 99.9% aren't? How am I, a normal every day citizen, supposed to know this?
Level of detail wise, the terrain does not render with any sophisticated geometry morphing situation. That's one of those things that for years I think most of the research that's gone into has been wasted. Geometry level of detail on terrain...there have been thousands of papers written about it, and I honestly don't think it's all that important. The way the hardware works, you're so much better off setting down a static mesh that's all in vertex and index buffers, and just letting the hardware plow through it, rather than going through and having the CPU attempt to do some really clever cross blended interpolation of vertices.
Ahh, the sweet sweet sound of infinite memory! Geometry detail algorithms ARE useful and relevant when you are dealing with tough memory constraints, especially on embedded platforms. Sure, it's nice to be able to just leave all the models in memory and just glDrawElements over and over, but this is only an option for platforms with a lot of memory or those that can quickly load the data over and over.